Bruce Kimmel is a former Board of Education member.
It seemed too good to be true when I first read the news stories, so I double-checked and, true enough, the Norwalk Board of Education, for the first time in memory, has included some of the significant stakeholders in preliminary discussions of the 2011-12 operating budget. According to reports, Superintendent Marks made sure representatives of the educational unions and the PTO Council had seats at the budget table from the get-go. Apparently, extensive meetings have been taking place on a weekly basis.
Some people might question the wisdom of including union representatives in these discussions, and they do have a point: Unions have their own interests and naturally will try to protect those interests. But so do Central Office personnel, and for years they’ve been part of the budget discussions. Plus, it’s about time we abandoned our standard budget scenario, which in the past pretty much excluded the educational unions, forcing them to present their budget ideas during the public participation phase of BOE meetings. I suspect that bringing organized labor to the table will eventually lead to some imaginative ways to save money.
Also of significance are the discussions that have taken place between the Superintendent and the city’s Finance Director, Tom Hamilton. Last year, I believe, was the first time the Finance Director and the Mayor, as well as the Board of Estimate and Taxation, met with school officials early in the budget cycle and suggested a spending cap for the 2010-11 operating budget. Unfortunately, last year’s recommendation was initially ignored as the Board initiated a game of chicken with city officials.
It might be worthwhile to briefly review what happened; hopefully, it won’t happen again: The Finance Director, the Mayor, and the BET clearly recommended that the Board adopt an operating budget for the 2010-11 fiscal year with a zero percent increase in spending. We were then in the midst of a terrible recession and revenues had decreased considerably. Ignoring the city’s fiscal watchdogs, the Board, after little discussion, adopted a budget that was five million above the recommendation.
Inexplicably, two contrary things then happened that confused the public: First, the Interim Superintendent again announced that the adopted budget was bare bones, clearly implying there was nothing to cut, apart from essential programs that benefit students. Second, Board members announced they would immediately begin looking for ways to trim the so-called bare bones budget. Finally, after considerable discussion – much of which was initiated by the unions – the Board settled on an operating budget that conformed to the recommendation from the Finance Director, the BET and Mayor.
The problem with this yearly game of chicken between city agencies and the BOE is that the public is caught in the middle and after a while doesn’t know what to believe. Last year was not the first time the BOE and the Superintendent predicted programmatic disaster, only to later make the necessary cuts without the system losing programs or key personnel. Fortunately, so far it seems the new Superintendent plans to work within the framework suggested by the Finance Director. However, I do question her use of “bare bones” so early in the process.
Nonetheless, compared to a few years ago, when budget discussions and presentations were not even properly noticed for the public, Marks seems to have adopted a radically more inclusive, as well as transparent, approach to the nitty-gritty aspects of budget crafting. Hopefully, this new approach will begin to rebuild trust among the BOE, the educational administration (often called Central Office), other city agencies and, most importantly, the public.
However, I would take this new approach a step further: To ensure the widest possible public participation, the BOE and Superintendent Marks might consider including members of “non-educational” groups, such as neighborhood or housing organizations, in these discussions.
Our public school system belongs to, and is supported by, the people of Norwalk; all the people, not only those who have a direct stake – such as a child or a job – in the system. Moreover, the long-term health of our city is in large measure dependent on the quality of education provided by our schools. It is incumbent on the BOE and the Superintendent to devise ways to include the broader public in budget discussions, as well as all other discussions that may have an impact on property taxes and property values.
The level of inclusiveness I am advocating is not the traditional way of doing things. But the world of education is changing and so must our BOE and the manner in which Norwalk develops its budgets. What could possibly be wrong with making our school budget process – and perhaps the budgets of other departments – community endeavors? Perhaps it’s time we cut through the silly distinction that divides our city into “taxpayers” and “parents,” as if these were mutually exclusive categories locked in a zero-sum budget struggle. Of course, the BOE would have final say – that’s what they were elected for – but including people with different perspectives is bound to enhance the overall process.
Bruce Kimmel
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Expansions Get Green Light
A version of this story appears in TheDailyNorwalk.com.
Five Norwalk elementary schools moved one step closer to building expansions to ease their overcrowding. On Tuesday evening, the Board of Education voted 8-1 in favor of the $4 million 2011-12 capital budget request. The budget is part of a larger approximately $30 million five-year plan that would expand Cranbury, Rowayton, Naramake, Jefferson and Columbus. The plan also includes funds to install air conditioning in all the elementary schools, upgrade technology, repair asphalt and concrete and bring other needed infrastructure improvements to the schools.
The initial $4.5 million approved by the board will begin the planning and design phase of construction at Naramake, Cranbury and Rowatyon. Actual groundbreaking at the schools wouldn’t occur until 2012-13. “Each year the budget will be brought back to the board,” said Dan Cook, the districts interim Chief Operating Officer. “Each year we will be adjusting the budget based on the previous year.”
Steve Colarossi, BOE finance committee chair, emphasized that the was “based on a study conducted by experts.” Board member Glenn Iannaccone reminded the board that Rowayton doesn’t have an auditorium that is large enough to accommodate the entire school.
BOE Chair Jack Chiaramonte described the expansion and repairs as necessary “This plan reprioritizes our needs. These are things we have to do.”
The lone dissenter, BOE member Sue Haynie, questioned the timing of the capital request. She discussed the poor state of the economy and conflicting enrollment trends in the city. District schools are “overused and underused”, she said. Haynie spoke of the possibility of a new charter school in South Norwalk the state’s inability to provide capital reimbursement. She also expressed dismay that Jefferson “has been waiting a long time.”
About the decision to delay Jefferson’s expansion plans a year, Colarossi said, “We need to spend the next year looking closely at the best possible model for Jefferson.” Currently, the school is both a magnet and neighborhood school.
Mayor Moccia, an ex-officio BOE member, addressed the fact that the state may not be in position to provide its typical 33 percent reimbursement on school construction projects which could change the City’s ability to fund the project. Nevertheless, the Mayor said, “We can’t stop the planning. We can always readjust.”
Board member Jodi Bishop-Pullan said, " It is the job of the BOE to make sure that our schools have adequate facilities. We need to move forwards with this.”
Haynie stated, “Next year, we could ask deeper questions.” She said that the current plan was “a plan in isolation, not aligned to a district vision.”
Five Norwalk elementary schools moved one step closer to building expansions to ease their overcrowding. On Tuesday evening, the Board of Education voted 8-1 in favor of the $4 million 2011-12 capital budget request. The budget is part of a larger approximately $30 million five-year plan that would expand Cranbury, Rowayton, Naramake, Jefferson and Columbus. The plan also includes funds to install air conditioning in all the elementary schools, upgrade technology, repair asphalt and concrete and bring other needed infrastructure improvements to the schools.
The initial $4.5 million approved by the board will begin the planning and design phase of construction at Naramake, Cranbury and Rowatyon. Actual groundbreaking at the schools wouldn’t occur until 2012-13. “Each year the budget will be brought back to the board,” said Dan Cook, the districts interim Chief Operating Officer. “Each year we will be adjusting the budget based on the previous year.”
Steve Colarossi, BOE finance committee chair, emphasized that the was “based on a study conducted by experts.” Board member Glenn Iannaccone reminded the board that Rowayton doesn’t have an auditorium that is large enough to accommodate the entire school.
BOE Chair Jack Chiaramonte described the expansion and repairs as necessary “This plan reprioritizes our needs. These are things we have to do.”
The lone dissenter, BOE member Sue Haynie, questioned the timing of the capital request. She discussed the poor state of the economy and conflicting enrollment trends in the city. District schools are “overused and underused”, she said. Haynie spoke of the possibility of a new charter school in South Norwalk the state’s inability to provide capital reimbursement. She also expressed dismay that Jefferson “has been waiting a long time.”
About the decision to delay Jefferson’s expansion plans a year, Colarossi said, “We need to spend the next year looking closely at the best possible model for Jefferson.” Currently, the school is both a magnet and neighborhood school.
Mayor Moccia, an ex-officio BOE member, addressed the fact that the state may not be in position to provide its typical 33 percent reimbursement on school construction projects which could change the City’s ability to fund the project. Nevertheless, the Mayor said, “We can’t stop the planning. We can always readjust.”
Board member Jodi Bishop-Pullan said, " It is the job of the BOE to make sure that our schools have adequate facilities. We need to move forwards with this.”
Haynie stated, “Next year, we could ask deeper questions.” She said that the current plan was “a plan in isolation, not aligned to a district vision.”
Monday, December 6, 2010
Colarossi Responds to Haynie Capital Critique
Steve Colarossi is the BOE Finance Committee Chairman.
As Chairperson of the Board of Education’s Finance Committee, I consider it my duty to explain the actions of the Committee as the comments posted by Mrs. Haynie do not fairly reflect our efforts. First, we have several schools that are over-crowded.
To assist us in assessing what the efforts should be to reduce this overcrowding, a competitive bid process was undertaken so that a firm would be hired to evaluate our elementary schools. The result was that Partners for Architecture was retained to study each elementary school and evaluate if, within current attendance districts, future population estimates warranted consideration of school expansion plans.
In any multivariate analysis, there must be some constants—the analytical tool fancied by Mrs. Haynie in which every conceivable and inconceivable potentiality is evaluated and factored simply does not exist.
In my opinion, the analysis undertaken is a fair assessment of future population shifts.
In my opinion, the experts retained by the Board of Education were well-versed in assessing the current data and developing an appropriate model to assess future population trends. The result was that we can expect several areas of Norwalk to see growth in the population of school-age children.This growth necessitates school expansion.
Secondly, there are significant studies that have examined the critical role a child’s physical environment has on his education—that is why I was such a vocal proponent in 2009 for the timely ordering of portable classrooms for Naramake. I knew that overcrowding, and using classrooms without adequate natural lighting, would have a profound impact on educational attainment. Therefore, expanding those schools which are currently over-crowded, and in which over-crowding is expected to continue, must be a priority. It is critical to student achievement.
Third, pre-school education is critical to our students. he program locations are not fungible, particularly for the typical-atypical programs. Therefore, there is simply no logic to suggesting that they can be moved without any analysis of the costs of retrofitting classrooms, designing physical therapy and occupational therapy facilities and training staff for the inclusion of these students.
School-based pre-school programs have been proven to close the achievement gap. Reducing or impinging those programs will undermine student achievement and should not be considered.
Fourth, the plan does not neglect Jefferson. Jefferson is blessed with an amazing principal, motivated staff and a student body that is making tremendous gains. If Jefferson were to become an entirely lottery-based magnet school, all overcrowding issues could be resolved. However, there is a significant neighborhood population that attends that school. Therefore, before there can be a final proposal for expansion and renovation of Jefferson, there must be critical dialogue with the community served by this school—which appears to be the process advocated by the critics of the capital budget proposal.Yet, the capital budget opponents use the lack of this community dialogue as a basis to prevent ANY forward movement for the overcrowded non-magnet schools.that facilitates capital (read: bricks and mortar) projects.
Our children deserve schools that are not over-crowded and we have the means to borrow a modest sum of money to take our analysis of needed school expansion to a logical next step.
Sixth, although many posters provided some detailed suggestions about operating budget reductions, the capital budget is an entirely separate matter. Capital funds cannot be used for operating expenses. Therefore, whether or not we expend $1.5 Million on elementary school projects will not impact the current operating budget.
The opinions expressed in this post reflect those of the author not NorwalkNet.com
As Chairperson of the Board of Education’s Finance Committee, I consider it my duty to explain the actions of the Committee as the comments posted by Mrs. Haynie do not fairly reflect our efforts. First, we have several schools that are over-crowded.
To assist us in assessing what the efforts should be to reduce this overcrowding, a competitive bid process was undertaken so that a firm would be hired to evaluate our elementary schools. The result was that Partners for Architecture was retained to study each elementary school and evaluate if, within current attendance districts, future population estimates warranted consideration of school expansion plans.
In any multivariate analysis, there must be some constants—the analytical tool fancied by Mrs. Haynie in which every conceivable and inconceivable potentiality is evaluated and factored simply does not exist.
In my opinion, the analysis undertaken is a fair assessment of future population shifts.
In my opinion, the experts retained by the Board of Education were well-versed in assessing the current data and developing an appropriate model to assess future population trends. The result was that we can expect several areas of Norwalk to see growth in the population of school-age children.This growth necessitates school expansion.
Secondly, there are significant studies that have examined the critical role a child’s physical environment has on his education—that is why I was such a vocal proponent in 2009 for the timely ordering of portable classrooms for Naramake. I knew that overcrowding, and using classrooms without adequate natural lighting, would have a profound impact on educational attainment. Therefore, expanding those schools which are currently over-crowded, and in which over-crowding is expected to continue, must be a priority. It is critical to student achievement.
Third, pre-school education is critical to our students. he program locations are not fungible, particularly for the typical-atypical programs. Therefore, there is simply no logic to suggesting that they can be moved without any analysis of the costs of retrofitting classrooms, designing physical therapy and occupational therapy facilities and training staff for the inclusion of these students.
School-based pre-school programs have been proven to close the achievement gap. Reducing or impinging those programs will undermine student achievement and should not be considered.
Fourth, the plan does not neglect Jefferson. Jefferson is blessed with an amazing principal, motivated staff and a student body that is making tremendous gains. If Jefferson were to become an entirely lottery-based magnet school, all overcrowding issues could be resolved. However, there is a significant neighborhood population that attends that school. Therefore, before there can be a final proposal for expansion and renovation of Jefferson, there must be critical dialogue with the community served by this school—which appears to be the process advocated by the critics of the capital budget proposal.Yet, the capital budget opponents use the lack of this community dialogue as a basis to prevent ANY forward movement for the overcrowded non-magnet schools.that facilitates capital (read: bricks and mortar) projects.
Our children deserve schools that are not over-crowded and we have the means to borrow a modest sum of money to take our analysis of needed school expansion to a logical next step.
Sixth, although many posters provided some detailed suggestions about operating budget reductions, the capital budget is an entirely separate matter. Capital funds cannot be used for operating expenses. Therefore, whether or not we expend $1.5 Million on elementary school projects will not impact the current operating budget.
The opinions expressed in this post reflect those of the author not NorwalkNet.com
Parent Has Concerns about Capital Budget
This is a letter by Lisa Thomson, parent activist concerning the capital budget request.
To: Messrs. Chiarmonte, Colarossi, Hempstead and Wilms
cc: Dr. Marks
I’m writing to you over concerns I still have regarding the 2011-2012 Preliminary Capital Budget request from the NPS Facilities and Maintenance Department. The state of our economy and education at both a national and state level cannot be ignored as we consider our own circumstances here in the City of Norwalk. Please consider the larger educational REFORM picture when casting your vote on how best to incur city capital expenses in education:
Does it decrease the achievement gap in Norwalk?
• Connecticut has the largest achievement gap in the country. Norwalk represents that gap given the diverse racial and socio-economics of our school district.
• The state recently received an application by Reverend Lindsay Curtis for a new Charter School at the elementary level. This is an effort to deal with Norwalk’s achievement gap with its students in South Norwalk, who lack their own local school and who, as a subgroup suffer the lowest performance scores on the CMTs.
• The school that seems to be the most in need of construction and renovation, with one of the largest student populations, and the only Norwalk school visible from an intra-state (Route 7), has been placed at the bottom of the construction list.
Does it improve adult accountability with respect to achievement?
• Due to historical contract negotiations, as parents and taxpayers, we suffer a union that dictates our school calendar, and class size, thus impacting the usage, the flexibility and the requirements for classroom space.
• We currently have an uneven distribution of students across this city due to both positive and negative circumstances that can be directly attributed to: a school’s reputation, principal leadership, as well as the successful or failed deployment of academic programs.
Have other options/considerations been fully explored before incurring this sort of debt?
• Historically speaking, magnet programs have proven very successful in Norwalk and other cities in terms of raising academic achievement and influencing school choice within the district at both and elementary, middle and high school level (Columbus, Jefferson, and CGS), but some have not (Silvermine).
• Some elementary schools have added Pre-K programs without taking into consideration future K-5 enrollment plans and this is now adversely impacting regular classrooms.
• Has the district tracked the number of children from the elementary schools to determine how many move through the NPS system onto our middle and high schools?
During my own review and participation in this process at Board of Ed meetings, I have observed the following:
• A single pre-school complaint at Cranbury from one physical therapist and parent was enough for the Board of Education to shelve a plan for re-locating the preschool a few miles away to a neighboring elementary with empty classrooms. What cost does that portion impose on the facilities and maintenance project?
• In lieu of the construction of a computer lab at another elementary school, has the facilities department spoken with the technology department and considered the possibility of deploying wireless technology directly into classrooms, thus enabling teachers to offer differentiated instruction, in real time, in the classroom? What would be that cost versus construction of a new computer lab?
• Arts and Music are critical to learning, but as a district in need of improvement, is building a music room and art room our highest priority at the moment? As many children in Norwalk participate in After School Programs, has the district considered offering arts outside of traditional school hours, thus increasing academic time during the regular school day and making better use of space?
I am a big proponent of INVESTMENT in education that promotes and supports REFORM initiatives like for example, air conditioning for year round school access or bringing technology into the classroom, so that teachers can tailor their instructional time. I am sure that there are many capital investment opportunities. However, bricks and mortar for building classrooms in one part of town, while classrooms remain empty in another part of town, will not solve Norwalk’s achievement gap or academic rigor issues. One need only look around, to the abandoned school sites, dotted around town that have been converted (or not) into other uses over the years.
I have no doubt that you each share a commitment to education, but your councils also have a fiduciary responsibility to the City of Norwalk. My hope is that you are CONFIDENT that all potential options have been vetted before committing the city to additional debt. To do so, without making sure that the investment was tied to REFORM would be a disservice to Norwalk’s children and its taxpayers. This is the direction the country is moving in and it should also be ours.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Lisa Brinton Thomson
The opinions in this letter express the views of the author and not NorwalkNet.com.
To: Messrs. Chiarmonte, Colarossi, Hempstead and Wilms
cc: Dr. Marks
I’m writing to you over concerns I still have regarding the 2011-2012 Preliminary Capital Budget request from the NPS Facilities and Maintenance Department. The state of our economy and education at both a national and state level cannot be ignored as we consider our own circumstances here in the City of Norwalk. Please consider the larger educational REFORM picture when casting your vote on how best to incur city capital expenses in education:
Does it decrease the achievement gap in Norwalk?
• Connecticut has the largest achievement gap in the country. Norwalk represents that gap given the diverse racial and socio-economics of our school district.
• The state recently received an application by Reverend Lindsay Curtis for a new Charter School at the elementary level. This is an effort to deal with Norwalk’s achievement gap with its students in South Norwalk, who lack their own local school and who, as a subgroup suffer the lowest performance scores on the CMTs.
• The school that seems to be the most in need of construction and renovation, with one of the largest student populations, and the only Norwalk school visible from an intra-state (Route 7), has been placed at the bottom of the construction list.
Does it improve adult accountability with respect to achievement?
• Due to historical contract negotiations, as parents and taxpayers, we suffer a union that dictates our school calendar, and class size, thus impacting the usage, the flexibility and the requirements for classroom space.
• We currently have an uneven distribution of students across this city due to both positive and negative circumstances that can be directly attributed to: a school’s reputation, principal leadership, as well as the successful or failed deployment of academic programs.
Have other options/considerations been fully explored before incurring this sort of debt?
• Historically speaking, magnet programs have proven very successful in Norwalk and other cities in terms of raising academic achievement and influencing school choice within the district at both and elementary, middle and high school level (Columbus, Jefferson, and CGS), but some have not (Silvermine).
• Some elementary schools have added Pre-K programs without taking into consideration future K-5 enrollment plans and this is now adversely impacting regular classrooms.
• Has the district tracked the number of children from the elementary schools to determine how many move through the NPS system onto our middle and high schools?
During my own review and participation in this process at Board of Ed meetings, I have observed the following:
• A single pre-school complaint at Cranbury from one physical therapist and parent was enough for the Board of Education to shelve a plan for re-locating the preschool a few miles away to a neighboring elementary with empty classrooms. What cost does that portion impose on the facilities and maintenance project?
• In lieu of the construction of a computer lab at another elementary school, has the facilities department spoken with the technology department and considered the possibility of deploying wireless technology directly into classrooms, thus enabling teachers to offer differentiated instruction, in real time, in the classroom? What would be that cost versus construction of a new computer lab?
• Arts and Music are critical to learning, but as a district in need of improvement, is building a music room and art room our highest priority at the moment? As many children in Norwalk participate in After School Programs, has the district considered offering arts outside of traditional school hours, thus increasing academic time during the regular school day and making better use of space?
I am a big proponent of INVESTMENT in education that promotes and supports REFORM initiatives like for example, air conditioning for year round school access or bringing technology into the classroom, so that teachers can tailor their instructional time. I am sure that there are many capital investment opportunities. However, bricks and mortar for building classrooms in one part of town, while classrooms remain empty in another part of town, will not solve Norwalk’s achievement gap or academic rigor issues. One need only look around, to the abandoned school sites, dotted around town that have been converted (or not) into other uses over the years.
I have no doubt that you each share a commitment to education, but your councils also have a fiduciary responsibility to the City of Norwalk. My hope is that you are CONFIDENT that all potential options have been vetted before committing the city to additional debt. To do so, without making sure that the investment was tied to REFORM would be a disservice to Norwalk’s children and its taxpayers. This is the direction the country is moving in and it should also be ours.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Lisa Brinton Thomson
The opinions in this letter express the views of the author and not NorwalkNet.com.
Friday, December 3, 2010
Haynie Questions Capital Request, Not 'New Normal'
Sue Haynie is a member of Norwalk's Board of Education.
The recession has created a fiscal austerity for public schooling that is being called the ‘New Normal’, with predictions that the effects of this recession could last 5 years or longer. Few have money to spare--not the Feds, not the State, not the City and certainly not the taxpayer.
The Norwalk Board of Education (BOE) will be voting on the BOE Finance Committees 5 year, approximately $35+/- million Preliminary Capital Budget request on December 6th. Has the BOE done its due diligence, or has it shirked it’s duty and left the hard questions for other government bodies to wrangle with? In times like these, when the BOE asks for $35+/- million of taxpayer money, there should be real clear answers to questions such as--- Is the bulk of this request based on a solid plan of action and solid data? Was the process as transparent as it should have been? Were the tough questions asked—and answered? Is it equitable? Does this request make sense at this time, right now? Have all alternatives been fully investigated? My feeling is that the answer to all these questions is a ‘no’.
The recession has created a fiscal austerity for public schooling that is being called the ‘New Normal’, with predictions that the effects of this recession could last 5 years or longer. Few have money to spare--not the Feds, not the State, not the City and certainly not the taxpayer.
The Norwalk Board of Education (BOE) will be voting on the BOE Finance Committees 5 year, approximately $35+/- million Preliminary Capital Budget request on December 6th. Has the BOE done its due diligence, or has it shirked it’s duty and left the hard questions for other government bodies to wrangle with? In times like these, when the BOE asks for $35+/- million of taxpayer money, there should be real clear answers to questions such as--- Is the bulk of this request based on a solid plan of action and solid data? Was the process as transparent as it should have been? Were the tough questions asked—and answered? Is it equitable? Does this request make sense at this time, right now? Have all alternatives been fully investigated? My feeling is that the answer to all these questions is a ‘no’.
Capital budgets, like this request, are primarily about ‘bricks and mortar’ and little of the funding is directly related to student achievement. Norwalk schools biggest problem is student achievement and accountability. This is a 5-year Capital Budget request that isn’t aligned with a 5-year district strategic plan. The tough questions were ignored or sidelined. We’re asking taxpayers to spend millions of dollars of money and we’re not sure where we’re going with it.
Some of the funding that has been requested is clearly needed. There is a need for the asphalt, paving, rigging and gym door repairs. It makes total sense to add A/C to those elementary schools without it to allow for 12 month educational access. A number of left-over Priority 5 ‘must-do’ items from the previous 5 year plan involving repairs at a large number of district schools should be addressed. The technology request is modest. These items alone represent millions of dollars.
As for school additions, we already have unused and underused space in the district. Why are we asking for millions of dollars in additions, in this economic climate, when we have not asked the why and what of those underused spaces? And, what’s the rush? If there is, in fact, such urgency, the school first in line would be Jefferson—and it’s not. Jefferson has 8 portables that have been in place for 6 years, has not been significantly renovated in 40 years, sits on a mere 6 acres of land, has playgrounds with no grass, kindergartens with no direct egress and has had consistent, long-term enrollment increases year after year---no other district school can claim anywhere near the same extent of need or ‘urgency’.
The New Normal, as Ed Secretary Arne Duncan notes, is a future of doing more with less, thinking before spending, a time to explore productive alternatives to the old way of doing things, an opportunity to innovate and a time of using what you’ve got and using it very well. The Preliminary Capital Budget request that will be voted on December 6th is not the New Normal, but rather the same old same old and I will vote no.
Sue Haynie
Republican Board of Ed Member
The opinions expressed in this post represent those of the author and not NorwalkNet.com
Kindergarten Age Change Proposed
The State Board of Education voted Wednesday to have fewer 4-year-old children entering kindergarten. The plan, which still needs approval by the General Assembly, moves up the kindergarten cutoff dates three months to Oct. 1 and will be phased in over four years. The current cutoff is Jan. 1.
The board says that there is now too wide an age range in kindergarten classrooms. The span is 4 to 6½ years old. Less variation in age makes teaching more focused and developmentally appropriate and could help address the state’s achievement gap.
"I think it would be a good change," says Susan Zanone, a kindergarten teacher at Columbus Magnet School in Norwalk who has been teaching for 20 years. "Kindergarten has changed so much. The expectations and requirements are more demanding. Some 4-year-olds are just not ready."
In addition, the state board wants to require parents who are considering delaying their children’s kindergarten entry a year to get approval from local boards of education. Some parents hold back their children because they are not mature enough or to give them an advantage in sports. Alternatively, the change will worry some parents because it means an extra year of preschool fees or inadequate childcare.
Superintendent Susan Marks agrees with changing the age to enter kindergarten, provided that there are good preschool options available. "It's good to start the kids older, as long as there is universal preschool with quality programs," she says.
Currently, Connecticut has one of the latest kindergarten cutoff dates in the nation. The proposed date change would bring the state in line with the rest of the country.
The board says that there is now too wide an age range in kindergarten classrooms. The span is 4 to 6½ years old. Less variation in age makes teaching more focused and developmentally appropriate and could help address the state’s achievement gap.
"I think it would be a good change," says Susan Zanone, a kindergarten teacher at Columbus Magnet School in Norwalk who has been teaching for 20 years. "Kindergarten has changed so much. The expectations and requirements are more demanding. Some 4-year-olds are just not ready."
In addition, the state board wants to require parents who are considering delaying their children’s kindergarten entry a year to get approval from local boards of education. Some parents hold back their children because they are not mature enough or to give them an advantage in sports. Alternatively, the change will worry some parents because it means an extra year of preschool fees or inadequate childcare.
Superintendent Susan Marks agrees with changing the age to enter kindergarten, provided that there are good preschool options available. "It's good to start the kids older, as long as there is universal preschool with quality programs," she says.
Currently, Connecticut has one of the latest kindergarten cutoff dates in the nation. The proposed date change would bring the state in line with the rest of the country.
Roton Obama Trip Gets No School Funds
A version of this story appears in TheDailyNorwalk.com.
Superintendent Susan Marks says no taxpayer money will be used to pay for buses for a field trip, which transported Roton Middle schoolers to see President Obama in Bridgeport last month. Students from Roton's Aspiring Males (RAM), an afterschool leadership development programs for boys, attended the Moving America Forward rally at which President Obama campaigned for incumbent congressman Jim Himes and US senate candidate Richard Blumenthal.
On Monday, Republican Town Committee Chairman Art Scialabba sent Marks an email asking for clarification about the trip and specificially who paid for it. After reading about in the Nov. 24 Norwalk Citizen News ("Roton's Aspiring Males are learning life's lessons"), Scialabba said he had concerns. "I wanted to make sure that kids were not being brought to a rally at taxpayer expense," he said. "There is a distinction between an official speaking in a public capacity and polititical one."
Marks responded to Scialabba by memo on Tuesday. "Norwalk Public Schools' money has not been used," she wrote. Scialabba said he was satisfied with Marks' response. It is not clear, however, who will pay for the buses. The bus company usually bills the schools for their services. Phone calls and email to the Roton principal and vice principal were not returned. According to Mike Barbis, the co-president of the Roton Parent Teacher Committee, the PTC has not been asked to pay for the buses.
"I want to listen and be responsive to concerns of the community," said Marks in an interview. "However," she added, "I think it is important to expose our students to educational opportunites that will increase their understanding of the world. Seeing the President is very exciting. The club trip was not intended to be political in nature."
Barbis said he also wrote a letter to Marks in support of the trip. "This was all about civics and nothing about politics," he said in his letter. "Allegations that this was a politicized outing and should not have been funded by the school system have it all wrong and do not understand what the RAMs program is all about."
Barbis's son, who participates in RAM program, went on the field trip. "The trip organizers talked to the kids and explained that this is a rally, and that they don't have to agree with it. They put it into context," said Barbis.
Lisa Thomson, the Roton PTC's other co-president agreed with Barbis and calls the Republican Town Committee's probe "disingenous and party politics." "Where are my politicians on real educational issues?" asks Thomson, a self-described independent, who is founder of REd Apples of Norwalk, a parent advocacy group on education issues. "Our kids go to IMAX and restaurants on Norwalk's dime. They shouldn't go see the President?"
BOE Chairman Jack Chiaramonte, a Republican, disagrees with the Roton parents. He called the trip a form of "indoctrination" and sees a "double standard" among liberals. "If this were a Republican or the Tea Party, the Left would be up in arms." Chiaramonte, like Scialabba, takes issue with the fact the event was a political rally. "If Obama was talking about an important issue, I'd be there with my family. But he wasn't. It was a rah rah rally."
Bob Duff, Norwalk’s Democratic State Senator said concerns about the field trip are overblown. "This was a whole lot of nothing," he said. "Our President was 10 miles away. Most Americans never get a chance to see the President." Duff notes that he, a Democrat, made sure to see George W. Bush when he used to come to the area. "Just because an event is partisan doesn't mean we should restrict the kids from going. The leaders of group have to make sure the kids understand that it is a partisan event and that there are other points of view. The kids should have an understanding of how government works."
Superintendent Susan Marks says no taxpayer money will be used to pay for buses for a field trip, which transported Roton Middle schoolers to see President Obama in Bridgeport last month. Students from Roton's Aspiring Males (RAM), an afterschool leadership development programs for boys, attended the Moving America Forward rally at which President Obama campaigned for incumbent congressman Jim Himes and US senate candidate Richard Blumenthal.
On Monday, Republican Town Committee Chairman Art Scialabba sent Marks an email asking for clarification about the trip and specificially who paid for it. After reading about in the Nov. 24 Norwalk Citizen News ("Roton's Aspiring Males are learning life's lessons"), Scialabba said he had concerns. "I wanted to make sure that kids were not being brought to a rally at taxpayer expense," he said. "There is a distinction between an official speaking in a public capacity and polititical one."
Marks responded to Scialabba by memo on Tuesday. "Norwalk Public Schools' money has not been used," she wrote. Scialabba said he was satisfied with Marks' response. It is not clear, however, who will pay for the buses. The bus company usually bills the schools for their services. Phone calls and email to the Roton principal and vice principal were not returned. According to Mike Barbis, the co-president of the Roton Parent Teacher Committee, the PTC has not been asked to pay for the buses.
"I want to listen and be responsive to concerns of the community," said Marks in an interview. "However," she added, "I think it is important to expose our students to educational opportunites that will increase their understanding of the world. Seeing the President is very exciting. The club trip was not intended to be political in nature."
Barbis said he also wrote a letter to Marks in support of the trip. "This was all about civics and nothing about politics," he said in his letter. "Allegations that this was a politicized outing and should not have been funded by the school system have it all wrong and do not understand what the RAMs program is all about."
Barbis's son, who participates in RAM program, went on the field trip. "The trip organizers talked to the kids and explained that this is a rally, and that they don't have to agree with it. They put it into context," said Barbis.
Lisa Thomson, the Roton PTC's other co-president agreed with Barbis and calls the Republican Town Committee's probe "disingenous and party politics." "Where are my politicians on real educational issues?" asks Thomson, a self-described independent, who is founder of REd Apples of Norwalk, a parent advocacy group on education issues. "Our kids go to IMAX and restaurants on Norwalk's dime. They shouldn't go see the President?"
BOE Chairman Jack Chiaramonte, a Republican, disagrees with the Roton parents. He called the trip a form of "indoctrination" and sees a "double standard" among liberals. "If this were a Republican or the Tea Party, the Left would be up in arms." Chiaramonte, like Scialabba, takes issue with the fact the event was a political rally. "If Obama was talking about an important issue, I'd be there with my family. But he wasn't. It was a rah rah rally."
Bob Duff, Norwalk’s Democratic State Senator said concerns about the field trip are overblown. "This was a whole lot of nothing," he said. "Our President was 10 miles away. Most Americans never get a chance to see the President." Duff notes that he, a Democrat, made sure to see George W. Bush when he used to come to the area. "Just because an event is partisan doesn't mean we should restrict the kids from going. The leaders of group have to make sure the kids understand that it is a partisan event and that there are other points of view. The kids should have an understanding of how government works."
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
The Budget: Will this year be different?
At last week's PTO Council meeting, Dr. Marks talked about this year's budget which promises to be as tight as the previous couple of years. Some parents expressed budget fatigue and suspicion. Who can blame them? The budget dance with all its threats of cuts and union vs. BOE antics, is suprisingly similar year after year and parents are catching on.
Dr. Marks explained at the meeting that she is approaching budget discussions differently by forming a committee composed of Central Office administrators, union leaders, and a parent.
In one respect it makes sense to have union participation in the development of a budget. After all salaries make up up the lionshare of the district's operational expenses. Marks said the group is going through the budget line by line and "scrubbing it" presumably to get rid of any excesses. However a part of me can't help but wonder how any meaningful changes can be made if Marks has to run every idea by a union head who has the ability to say "no." Unions by their nature are supposed to act in the best interestes of their members, but Marks is supposed to act in the best interest of our children's education. Sometimes those interests are aligned. Many other times they conflict especially if you're asking teachers to change how they've been doing their jobs.
When Marks discussed the budget last Monday, I expected to hear the words like "rethink," "restructure," and "reorganize". I am waiting not only for a new process from our schools chief but new ideas that will bring about improved results. We'll see next week, when Marks presents the draft budget to the BOE whether we'll be singing a new tune or dancing the same old dance.
Dr. Marks explained at the meeting that she is approaching budget discussions differently by forming a committee composed of Central Office administrators, union leaders, and a parent.
In one respect it makes sense to have union participation in the development of a budget. After all salaries make up up the lionshare of the district's operational expenses. Marks said the group is going through the budget line by line and "scrubbing it" presumably to get rid of any excesses. However a part of me can't help but wonder how any meaningful changes can be made if Marks has to run every idea by a union head who has the ability to say "no." Unions by their nature are supposed to act in the best interestes of their members, but Marks is supposed to act in the best interest of our children's education. Sometimes those interests are aligned. Many other times they conflict especially if you're asking teachers to change how they've been doing their jobs.
When Marks discussed the budget last Monday, I expected to hear the words like "rethink," "restructure," and "reorganize". I am waiting not only for a new process from our schools chief but new ideas that will bring about improved results. We'll see next week, when Marks presents the draft budget to the BOE whether we'll be singing a new tune or dancing the same old dance.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Expansions Planned at Five Schools
Five Norwalk elementary schools may be expanded to address increasing enrollment and overcrowding issues. The Board of Education's $28 million capital budget request for 2011-12 includes construction at Naramake, Cranbury, Rowayton, Columbus and Jefferson elementary schools and air conditioning at all elementary schools.
Expected for a school board vote next week, the five-year capital request will be passed on to the city's Finance Department in early December.
The school board based its capital request on an elementary school facilities study by Partners for Architecture, available on the district's homepage. In July, the firm recommended expansion at the five schools based on current space usage and enrollment projections. The middle schools and high schools have adequate capacity.
"We recognized that enrollment was going up in some elementary schools," said Mark Gorian, director of NPS facilities, who said no building work has been done in the last four to five years. There are four portables at Rowayton, a portable at Naramake and an eight-classroom portable at Jefferson Elementary to handle overflow.
Gorian said schools also need more space for the preschools housed in the elementary schools, new computer labs and classrooms for special needs students and English language learners. More elementary schools are running year-round and longer days, he said, explaining the need for air conditioning.
"We are trying to bring equity to all of the school," Gorian said. "There should be dedicated space at all the schools for the same services like art and music. At some schools, students have art brought into their classrooms on a cart and no dedicated space."
The capital request spans five years. Work at Naramake, Rowayton and Cranbury is scheduled to start next year because the "need is most immediate," Gorian said. Jefferson and Columbus are scheduled for the following year. The capital also includes funds for asphalt and concrete for improved sidewalks and driveways, stage rigging systems and curtains, and folding gym doors. Capital projects at schools are financed and managed by the city.
BOE Chair Jack Chiaramonte stressed that the capital request, even if it passed by the school board, is "preliminary". "It still has to pass through some hoops on the cityside," he said. In addition, Chiaramonte added that because of the the state's fiscal problems and deficit, the state may not be offering its usual refund to help play for school capital improvement projects.
Expected for a school board vote next week, the five-year capital request will be passed on to the city's Finance Department in early December.
The school board based its capital request on an elementary school facilities study by Partners for Architecture, available on the district's homepage. In July, the firm recommended expansion at the five schools based on current space usage and enrollment projections. The middle schools and high schools have adequate capacity.
"We recognized that enrollment was going up in some elementary schools," said Mark Gorian, director of NPS facilities, who said no building work has been done in the last four to five years. There are four portables at Rowayton, a portable at Naramake and an eight-classroom portable at Jefferson Elementary to handle overflow.
Gorian said schools also need more space for the preschools housed in the elementary schools, new computer labs and classrooms for special needs students and English language learners. More elementary schools are running year-round and longer days, he said, explaining the need for air conditioning.
"We are trying to bring equity to all of the school," Gorian said. "There should be dedicated space at all the schools for the same services like art and music. At some schools, students have art brought into their classrooms on a cart and no dedicated space."
The capital request spans five years. Work at Naramake, Rowayton and Cranbury is scheduled to start next year because the "need is most immediate," Gorian said. Jefferson and Columbus are scheduled for the following year. The capital also includes funds for asphalt and concrete for improved sidewalks and driveways, stage rigging systems and curtains, and folding gym doors. Capital projects at schools are financed and managed by the city.
BOE Chair Jack Chiaramonte stressed that the capital request, even if it passed by the school board, is "preliminary". "It still has to pass through some hoops on the cityside," he said. In addition, Chiaramonte added that because of the the state's fiscal problems and deficit, the state may not be offering its usual refund to help play for school capital improvement projects.
Cranbury Celebrates New Playground
A version of this story appears in TheDailyNorwalk.com
All of Cranbury Elementary School piled onto their new playground on a blustery Wednesday morning chanting "Playground! Playground!" The students were celebrating the official opening of the play area and its new swings, climbing structures and lots of monkey bars.
PTO President April Guilbault, along with the playground committee of Cranbury dads Bill Smith, John Claudio, Tony Brown and George Arvanitis, cut the red ribbon.
The playground had been over a year in the making, says Guilbault, who spearheaded the project. "The old playground was sad. It was small, had no swings, broken parts, chipped paint, and just wasn't safe," she said of the 13-year-old facility. "The new playground utilizes the space much better."
After becoming PTO president, Guilbault reached out to Mike Moccaie, director of Parks and Recreation, and made the case for a new playground. "It was a question of good timing, need and speaking up," says Guilbault.
The city's playgrounds, including the ones at schools, are paid for and maintained by the Parks and Recreation Dept. Cranbury's playground cost $89,000, according to Moccaie. The life expectancy of a playground is approximately 15 years, during which the city replaces equipment as needed. Wolfpit and Jefferson Elementary Schools are slated to get new playgrounds in the next year, says Moccaie.
Cranbury PTO mom Susan Zelman adds, "This school is a big believer in going outside for recess every day." Zelman's second-grade son, Alex, goes out for recess after lunch and is excited about one new playground feature. "I'm happy it has swings."
Guilbault adds that the playground is used by more than just the school. "This is a neighborhood playground," she says, noting that there are summer camps at the school and baseball games on the adjacent field. "It is used by so many kids."
Are you satisfied with the playground at your school?
All of Cranbury Elementary School piled onto their new playground on a blustery Wednesday morning chanting "Playground! Playground!" The students were celebrating the official opening of the play area and its new swings, climbing structures and lots of monkey bars.
PTO President April Guilbault, along with the playground committee of Cranbury dads Bill Smith, John Claudio, Tony Brown and George Arvanitis, cut the red ribbon.
The playground had been over a year in the making, says Guilbault, who spearheaded the project. "The old playground was sad. It was small, had no swings, broken parts, chipped paint, and just wasn't safe," she said of the 13-year-old facility. "The new playground utilizes the space much better."
After becoming PTO president, Guilbault reached out to Mike Moccaie, director of Parks and Recreation, and made the case for a new playground. "It was a question of good timing, need and speaking up," says Guilbault.
The city's playgrounds, including the ones at schools, are paid for and maintained by the Parks and Recreation Dept. Cranbury's playground cost $89,000, according to Moccaie. The life expectancy of a playground is approximately 15 years, during which the city replaces equipment as needed. Wolfpit and Jefferson Elementary Schools are slated to get new playgrounds in the next year, says Moccaie.
Cranbury PTO mom Susan Zelman adds, "This school is a big believer in going outside for recess every day." Zelman's second-grade son, Alex, goes out for recess after lunch and is excited about one new playground feature. "I'm happy it has swings."
Guilbault adds that the playground is used by more than just the school. "This is a neighborhood playground," she says, noting that there are summer camps at the school and baseball games on the adjacent field. "It is used by so many kids."
Are you satisfied with the playground at your school?
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Marks Warns of 'Bare Bones' Budget
Superintendent Susan Marks told the district's PTO Council that she expects a "bare bones" operating budget for the 2011-12 school year even though spending is expected to increase.
Marks told the council at a meeting Monday night that she has met with Tom Hamilton, city director of finance, who indicated the school board should expect a 2.5 percent to 3 percent increase over last year's $150 million budget. Last year, the city gave the schools a zero percent increase.
"We plan to present a budget that is frugal, with no extras, but that meets our needs," said Marks, who didn't rule out cuts. "We may need to cut people or programs."
Marks said employee benefits and negotiated salary increases eat up most of that increase. She also noted that this year the district is losing $2.8 million in federal stimulus funds. In addition, Marks predicts a loss of $1.4 million in state funding.
But Marks hopes to have $500,000 carried over from a jobs bill passed by Congress in September to save teaching jobs, and she's also seeking grants.
For the past five weeks, a budget committee has been meeting and "going over each line and scrubbing the budget," Marks said. Bruce Mellion, president of the Norwalk Federation of Teachers, attended Monday's meeting. "This is the first time such a committee has met. We are all involved from Day 1," said Mellion, who sits on the committee, with administrators, union representatives and parents.
Marks and Mellion emphasized the need for parents to advocate for the schools before city officials who determine the budget. Kerry O'Neill, PTOC vice president, pointed to a perceived "lack of trust" among the school board, the city and parents.
"We've been through this before," she said. Marks said she hopes to rebuild that trust.
The draft budget will be presented to the school board early next month. On Dec. 13, the PTOC will discuss it.
Marks told the council at a meeting Monday night that she has met with Tom Hamilton, city director of finance, who indicated the school board should expect a 2.5 percent to 3 percent increase over last year's $150 million budget. Last year, the city gave the schools a zero percent increase.
"We plan to present a budget that is frugal, with no extras, but that meets our needs," said Marks, who didn't rule out cuts. "We may need to cut people or programs."
Marks said employee benefits and negotiated salary increases eat up most of that increase. She also noted that this year the district is losing $2.8 million in federal stimulus funds. In addition, Marks predicts a loss of $1.4 million in state funding.
But Marks hopes to have $500,000 carried over from a jobs bill passed by Congress in September to save teaching jobs, and she's also seeking grants.
For the past five weeks, a budget committee has been meeting and "going over each line and scrubbing the budget," Marks said. Bruce Mellion, president of the Norwalk Federation of Teachers, attended Monday's meeting. "This is the first time such a committee has met. We are all involved from Day 1," said Mellion, who sits on the committee, with administrators, union representatives and parents.
Marks and Mellion emphasized the need for parents to advocate for the schools before city officials who determine the budget. Kerry O'Neill, PTOC vice president, pointed to a perceived "lack of trust" among the school board, the city and parents.
"We've been through this before," she said. Marks said she hopes to rebuild that trust.
The draft budget will be presented to the school board early next month. On Dec. 13, the PTOC will discuss it.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
ConnCAN Gives Norwalk Sub Par Grades
ConnCAN, a state educational advocacy group, gave the Norwalk school district lackluster grades, mostly Cs, Ds and Fs, in student performance on its annual school report cards. On Friday, The Connecticut Coalition for Achievement Now (ConnCAN) released its 2010 School Report Cards, assigning letter grades to over 1,000 Connecticut public schools and 160 school districts based on their students’ academic performance in four categories.
“ConnCAN’s report cards..help Connecticut’s parents take an active role in securing the best possible public education for their children,” said Alex Johnston, ConnCAN’s CEO. “The data allow us to have an honest conversation about the performance of our public schools so that we can maintain a laser-sharp focus on our most important task: improving student outcomes across the board.
While Norwalk as a district fared below average, several individual schools did appear on ConnCAN's Top 10 Connecticut public schools in categories in ranging from from Performance Gains to Low-Income Student Performance and African American Student Performance. Fox Run Elementary School ranked 10 in African American student performance. Two Norwalk school ranked in the top ten in Hispanic student performance--Brookside ranked 5th and Marvin ranked 8th. Side by Side Community School ranked 7th for middle school improvement. . The grades, assigned by ConnCAN for the past five years, are based on the 2010 CMT and CAPT scores. Click here to read about the Methodology of ConnCAN’s School and District Report Cards.
Here is how Norwalk scored:
Elementary Schools
Performance Gain: B
Overall Student Performance: C+
Student Subgroup Performance: D+
Achievement Gap: D-
Middle Schools
Performance Gain: C
Overall Student Performance: C
Student Subgroup Performance: C-
Achievement Gap: D
Performance Gain: B
Overall Student Performance: C+
Student Subgroup Performance: D+
Achievement Gap: D-
Middle Schools
Performance Gain: C
Overall Student Performance: C
Student Subgroup Performance: C-
Achievement Gap: D
High Schools:
Overall Student Performance: D
Student Subgroup Performance: F
Achievement Gap: F
Overall Student Performance: D
Student Subgroup Performance: F
Achievement Gap: F
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Two Schools Lose Federal Funding
A version of this story appears in TheDailyNorwalk.com.
Cranbury and Fox Run Elementary schools have lost significant federal funding this year. They did not meet the cutoff to receive Title 1 funding, annual federal grants awarded to school districts with a high percentage of disadvantaged students. This means each school will receive approximately $50,000 less for teachers' aides, professional development and technology. It could result in a slowing of academic progress.
At Fox Run, Principal James Martinez used his funds last year to get most of his teachers trained in Readers Workshop, a new literacy program. He also used some of the funds for SMART Boards to enhance technology in the classrooms. In addition, he was able to hire aides who specifically worked with struggling students. "I put a lot of emphasis on professional development," says Martinez.
Cranbury Principal Robin Ives also used most of her money last year on staffing, specifically teachers' aides. Ives has been in a position before where she lost Title I funding. "I've learned to not count on it. I have to plan with what I know I'm getting," she says.
Since the grant focuses on elementary education, Title 1 schools get full-time literacy specialists. This year, without Title 1, Cranbury and Fox Run have to share a literacy specialist.
Ives and Martinez are concerned because their schools have been making academic strides, especially in the last year. Cranbury got off the No Child Left Behind "Needs Improvement" list. Fox Run was recognized by the Lone Pine Foundation last week for its academic gains. "The primary concern in losing funding is being able to sustain our progress without these resources," says Martinez.
Ives echoes Martinez's sentiments. "You hope you can continue the same level of progress, but it's not always the reality," she said.
According to the district's grants specialist, Italia Negroni, "The purpose of Title 1 is to give the neediest students extra resources." Schools are eligible if they exceed the average percent of free and reduced lunch students across the district as determined by Oct. 1 enrollment data. Last year, Norwalk had 37 percent free and reduced lunch students. "It's frustrating," says Ives. "You can miss out on the funds because you are one student below the cutoff," says Ives. This year, Brookside, Jefferson, Kendall, Marvin, Silvermine, Tracey and Wolfpit elementary schools receive Title I monies. The allotment varies from school to school.
Cranbury and Fox Run Elementary schools have lost significant federal funding this year. They did not meet the cutoff to receive Title 1 funding, annual federal grants awarded to school districts with a high percentage of disadvantaged students. This means each school will receive approximately $50,000 less for teachers' aides, professional development and technology. It could result in a slowing of academic progress.
At Fox Run, Principal James Martinez used his funds last year to get most of his teachers trained in Readers Workshop, a new literacy program. He also used some of the funds for SMART Boards to enhance technology in the classrooms. In addition, he was able to hire aides who specifically worked with struggling students. "I put a lot of emphasis on professional development," says Martinez.
Cranbury Principal Robin Ives also used most of her money last year on staffing, specifically teachers' aides. Ives has been in a position before where she lost Title I funding. "I've learned to not count on it. I have to plan with what I know I'm getting," she says.
Since the grant focuses on elementary education, Title 1 schools get full-time literacy specialists. This year, without Title 1, Cranbury and Fox Run have to share a literacy specialist.
Ives and Martinez are concerned because their schools have been making academic strides, especially in the last year. Cranbury got off the No Child Left Behind "Needs Improvement" list. Fox Run was recognized by the Lone Pine Foundation last week for its academic gains. "The primary concern in losing funding is being able to sustain our progress without these resources," says Martinez.
Ives echoes Martinez's sentiments. "You hope you can continue the same level of progress, but it's not always the reality," she said.
According to the district's grants specialist, Italia Negroni, "The purpose of Title 1 is to give the neediest students extra resources." Schools are eligible if they exceed the average percent of free and reduced lunch students across the district as determined by Oct. 1 enrollment data. Last year, Norwalk had 37 percent free and reduced lunch students. "It's frustrating," says Ives. "You can miss out on the funds because you are one student below the cutoff," says Ives. This year, Brookside, Jefferson, Kendall, Marvin, Silvermine, Tracey and Wolfpit elementary schools receive Title I monies. The allotment varies from school to school.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Chiaramonte Leads School Board
Jack Chiaramonte was elected chairman of the Board of Education on Tuesday evening. Chiaramonte, a District D member, has been a vocal critic of the teachers union. Former Chair Glenn Iannaccone becomes Vice Chair, and Jody Bishop-Pullan is secretary. All three were elected unanimously by their fellow board members and will serve one year terms. There were no other nominations.
Mayor Richard Moccia, who presided over the elections as an ex-officio member, and Superintendent Susan Marks thanked Iannaccone for his service and expressed good wishes to Chiaramonte. "I'm glad you chose me," said Marks referring to Iannaccone's role in hiring her, "and I look forward to working with Jack."
Chiaramonte has served on the board for three years, and he and Iannaccone are the panel's senior Republicans. According to BOE bylaws, the majority party holds the chairman and vice chairman positions, while the minority party gets secretary.
In an interview prior to the meeting, Chiaramonte said he has a "common sense approach." He said the current board has made "vast improvements" to the school district. "We selected a terrific new superintendent and have improved special education."
Chiaramonte plans to "watch how every dollar is being spent." He does not believe that money is the only answer to the issues facing the district. "We need to be frugal. Now is a time we have to do more with less."
During last year's budget reconciliation process, Chiaramonte often expressed frustration with Bruce Mellion, president of the Norwalk Federation of Teachers, for not agreeing to givebacks. "There was mistrust on both sides," he said. However, he credits Marks with bringing all parties, including union members, administrators and BOE members, together in the form of a committee to start working on the budget. "She is a bridge builder and is bringing everyone to the table right from the beginning."
Mellion, too, was conciliatory toward Chiaramonte. "What is done is done," he said. "What is important now is that Jack be a positive and constructive force as a leader."
Chiaramonte, owner of Sono Silver, a jewelry store in South Norwalk, has two children at Norwalk High and is a "proud band parent." He moved to Norwalk from Queens in 1991. "I like it here. Norwalk is a real town where people help one another."
Mayor Richard Moccia, who presided over the elections as an ex-officio member, and Superintendent Susan Marks thanked Iannaccone for his service and expressed good wishes to Chiaramonte. "I'm glad you chose me," said Marks referring to Iannaccone's role in hiring her, "and I look forward to working with Jack."
Chiaramonte has served on the board for three years, and he and Iannaccone are the panel's senior Republicans. According to BOE bylaws, the majority party holds the chairman and vice chairman positions, while the minority party gets secretary.
In an interview prior to the meeting, Chiaramonte said he has a "common sense approach." He said the current board has made "vast improvements" to the school district. "We selected a terrific new superintendent and have improved special education."
Chiaramonte plans to "watch how every dollar is being spent." He does not believe that money is the only answer to the issues facing the district. "We need to be frugal. Now is a time we have to do more with less."
During last year's budget reconciliation process, Chiaramonte often expressed frustration with Bruce Mellion, president of the Norwalk Federation of Teachers, for not agreeing to givebacks. "There was mistrust on both sides," he said. However, he credits Marks with bringing all parties, including union members, administrators and BOE members, together in the form of a committee to start working on the budget. "She is a bridge builder and is bringing everyone to the table right from the beginning."
Mellion, too, was conciliatory toward Chiaramonte. "What is done is done," he said. "What is important now is that Jack be a positive and constructive force as a leader."
Chiaramonte, owner of Sono Silver, a jewelry store in South Norwalk, has two children at Norwalk High and is a "proud band parent." He moved to Norwalk from Queens in 1991. "I like it here. Norwalk is a real town where people help one another."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
